Rough roads cost drivers $2B annually, report says

Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department Director Scott Bennett speaks at a news conference Tuesday at the state Capitol in Little Rock. A national transportation research group released a report Tuesday that said poor roads and bridges cost state motorists about $2 billion a year in vehicle-related expenses.
Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department Director Scott Bennett speaks at a news conference Tuesday at the state Capitol in Little Rock. A national transportation research group released a report Tuesday that said poor roads and bridges cost state motorists about $2 billion a year in vehicle-related expenses.

Deteriorating, dangerous and congested roads cost Arkansas motorists $2 billion annually through added vehicle operating costs, traffic crashes and delays, according to a new report by a transportation advocacy group.

The report, "Arkansas Transportation by the Numbers: Meeting the State's Need for Safe and Efficient Mobility," was put together by TRIP, a nonprofit organization that researches and distributes economic and technical reports on highways.

TRIP said it is funded by insurance companies, equipment manufacturers, distributors, and suppliers and businesses involved in highway and transit engineering and construction, among other organizations. Its chairman this year is Don Weaver, the owner of Weaver-Bailey Contractors Inc. of El Paso.

More than half of the $2 billion cost is attributed to poorly maintained roads, which TRIP said results in accelerated vehicle depreciation, additional vehicle repairs, increased fuel consumption and more tire wear. Those costs were calculated from a highway management model used by the U.S. Transportation Department and more than 100 nations.

Nearly a third of the state's major urban and locally maintained roads are rated in poor condition, and 23 percent of major rural state-maintained and local roads are in poor condition, the report found. In the Little Rock area, more than half of major roads are in poor condition, according to data the organization gleaned from the Federal Highway Administration.

Almost $700 million in costs for motorists is attributed by the report to lack of safety features on state roadways, such as a sufficient number of lanes, sufficient lane widths, rumble strips, paved shoulders, guard rails and intersection design. A lack of roadway safety features is estimated to be a contributing factor in a third of all fatal crashes, according to TRIP.

An average of 575 people have died annually in Arkansas traffic crashes since 2008, according to the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration.

Arkansas' overall traffic fatality rate of 1.65 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled in 2012, the latest for which statistics are available, is the fifth-highest in the nation. The fatality rate on non-interstate rural roads jumped to 2.71 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled.

The costs to motorists are based on economic factors, such as lost productivity and hospital care, said Rocky Moretti, TRIP's policy and research director, who said his organization is a clearinghouse for information but doesn't push specific legislative initiatives.

The Arkansas Highway and Transportation Department spends about $1 billion annually on road construction from state and federal fuel taxes. Although more miles are being traveled in the state, highway officials say fuel revenue is flat or declining as vehicles become more fuel efficient.

State voters approved road improvement initiatives in 2011 and 2012. The 2011 initiative is a $1.2 billion program to improve sections of interstates. Passage of a 0.5 percent increase in the state sales tax, in place for 10 years, will help finance a $1.8 billion road construction program that will widen and ease congestion on major highways around the state.

That $3 billion is targeted at less than 4 percent of the state's 16,000 miles of highways, said Scott Bennett, the state's top highway official.

Bennett used Tuesday's news conference to tout his agency's frequently cited statistics: It has the 12th-largest highway network to maintain, ranks 44th in revenue per mile and has the second-lowest administrative cost per mile among state highway agencies.

Meanwhile, federal funding is an uncertainty. With the latest extension of federal funding scheduled to expire in May, state highway officials pulled three projects worth $30 million that were scheduled to be awarded contracts later this month.

"The state is doing the best it can with the resources it has," Moretti said.

The release of the report comes before the 90th regular meeting of the state General Assembly, which is scheduled to convene next week.

Robert Moore Jr. of Arkansas City, a member of the Arkansas Highway Commission and former speaker of the state House of Representatives, used the report to illustrate the need for incoming legislators and Gov.-elect Asa Hutchinson to consider highway funding.

Given that voters have voted for two highway initiatives since 2011, elected officials already know Arkansans are receptive to the idea of devoting more money to roads, Moore said.

"You can't go wrong because people have said they want good roads," Moore said.

Moore also argued that while other areas of state responsibility -- education, health care and security -- are important, more money invested in those areas doesn't guarantee results like more money for highways can.

"If you want good roads, you need money to do it," he said. "We have the efficiency in place to do the job."

A proposal to phase in the transfer of general revenue to the Highway Department that fell a vote short in a state House transportation committee two years ago is expected to be reconsidered in a modified form.

"We are working on a bill," state Rep. Dan Douglas, R-Bentonville, the lead sponsor this year, said in an interview. "I just received the second draft today."

The new bill will contain provisions to steer some of the transfer back to higher education and workforce development, Douglas said.

"It is more of an overall economic development bill than a highway bill," he said.

Once the bill is polished, Douglas said, he will sit down with higher education officials -- who opposed the earlier version of the bill -- and Hutchinson before he files it.

Metro on 01/07/2015

Upcoming Events